Top 100 Most Overated Courses in America

[Jeremy_Glenn.]

The following list was made by comparing the ranking of a course WITH Tradition and Walking vs. the ranking of that same course WITHOUT Tradition and Walking.  

A negative value means that it dropped down by that many spots without the crutch of tradition and walking.  A positive value means it went up by that many values.  For example, Colonial would go from 35th to 68th, so its value is -33.  Pacific Dunes went from 47th to 9th, so its value is +38.  Pine Valley or Pebble Beach, for example, are ranked just about right.

Courses with a negative value could be considered overated.  Those with a positive value are underated.  

Rank Value   Course
1      -37      Canterbury G.C.
2      -36      Wannamoisett C.C.
3      -33      Colonial C.C.
4      -30      Interlachen C.C.
5      -30      The Homestead (Cascades)
6      -30      Balt imore C.C. (East)
7      -30      Salem C.C.
8      -29      Riviera C.C.
9      -27      Aronimink G.C.
10      -26      Plainfield C.C.
11      -26      Kittansett Club
12      -24      Hazeltine National G.C.
13      -24      Congressional C.C. (Blue)
14      -23      Bal tusrol G.C. (Lower)
15      -23      Garden City G.C.
16      -22      Cherry Hills C.C.
17      -22      Maidstone Club
18      -22      Point O’Woods G. & C.C.
19      -21      Harbour Town G. Links
20      -19      Scioto C.C.
21      -18      The Country Club (Clyde/Squirrel)
22      -18      Chicago G.C.
23      -17      Olympia Fields C.C. (North)
24      -17      East Lake G.C.
25      -16      Inverness Club
26      -15      The Dunes G. & Beach C.
27      -15      Blackwolf Run (River)
28      -15      Desert Forest G.C.
29      -13      Spyglass Hill G. Cse.
30      -13      Bellerive C.C.
31      -12      Oakland Hills C.C. (South)
32      -12      Peach tree G.C.
33      -12      Cog Hill G. & C.C. (No. 4)
34      -11      Laurel Valley G.C.
35      -10      Southern Hills C.C.
36      -10      The Olympic Club (Lake)
37      -9      Medinah C.C. (No. 3)
38      -9      Pine Tree G.C.
39      -8      Quaker Ridge G.C.
40      -8      San Francisco G.C.
41      -8      Milwaukee C.C.
42      -7      Pinehurst Resort & C.C. (No. 2)
43      -7      Los Angeles C.C. (North)
44      -7      Old Warson C.C.
45      -7      NCR C.C. (South)
46      -6      Somerset Hills C.C.
47      -5      Oak Hill C.C. (East)
48      -5      Crooked Stick G.C.
49      -3      Winged Foot G.C. (West)
50      -3      Winged Foot G.C. (East)
51      -2      Oakmont C.C.
52      -2      Seminole G.C.
53      -2      National Golf Links of America
54      -2      Prairie Dunes C.C.
55      -2      Atlanta C.C.
56      -1      Augusta National G.C.
57      -1      Cypress Point Club
58      -1      Pasatiempo G.C.
59      0      Pine Valley G.C.
60      0      Pebble Beach G. Links
61      0      Merion G.C. (East)
62      0      Shore acres
63      0      Stanwich Club
64      1      Camargo Club
65      2      Butler National G.C.
66      2      Shoal Creek
67      2      Jupiter Hills Club (Hills)
68      2      Eugene C.C.
69      2      Sahalee C.C. (South/North)
70      3      The Golf Club
71      3      TPC at Sawgrass (Stadium)
72      4      Shinnecock Hills G.C.
73      7      Muirfield Village G.C.
74      9      Mauna Kea G. Cse.
75      10      Crystal Downs C.C.
76      10      Fishers Island Club
77      10      Greenville C.C. (Chanticleer)
78      13      Bethpage State Park G. Cse. (Black)
79      16      Long Cove Club
80      19      The Honors Cse.
81      19      Castle Pines G.C.
82      25      Grandfather G. & C.C.
83      27      Wade Hampton G.C.
84      29      Valhalla G.C.
85      30      Sand Hills G.C.
86      30      Shadow Creek
87      33      The Ocean Cse.
88      34      Forest Highlands G.C. (Canyon)
89      35      Victoria National G.C.
90      38      Pacific Dunes
91      38      Black Diamond Ranch G.C. (Quarry)
92      39      Bandon Dunes
93      39      Double Eagle Club
94      40      Sycamore Hills G.C.
95      41      Whistling Straits (Straits)
96      42      Prince Course
97      43      Ocean Forest G.C.
98      55      The Estancia Club
99      55      Rich Harvest Links
100      56      The Quarry at La Quinta

[John_Conley]

Great stuff, Jeremy.  Tradition should be no more than 2 points.  All other cateogries are pretty much 7.00 to 8.99.  Tradition scores range from just above zero to 8.5!

[Matt_Ward]

Jeremy G:

Appreciate the analysis, but I don't believe one
can craft a statement that says "if you take away from "x" number of categories (tradition & walking) and add the
rest --- waalaa -- you have a better grouping of courses.

Plainfield is not overrated. Ditto Wannamoisett. Ditto Garden City GC. There are a host of others I could also include -- along with those that received "positive" points that I believe are just not that good even without tradition and walking calculated into the mix.

Like I said at the outset -- I do appreciate your efforts though ...

[John_Conley]

Matt:

Good points about older courses like Wannamoisett.  I'm most familiar with Interlachen and have always known it benefits from Tradition as much as any course does.

Put 150 courses in the Top 100 and these problems would be alleviated.

[Matt_Ward]

John:

The issue with GD is that it's ratings have dissolved into a Zagat's guide. It's no different than asking me about food -- my wife still thinks my only opinion on the subject deals with burgers and the like.

You have people being added to the GD panel whose opinions I just have to question. Couple that with the inane categories thrown in -- the infamous fudge factor -- and you have to wonder what is being assessed as the so-called "Greatest" in American golf. My experiences, and those of others who I respect here on GCA, prove otherwise.

To be fair I have to say that GW has indeed trumped (no reference to Donald!) the kind of due diligence needed for course assessments. It's not perfect, but if you compare the listings (broad national categories and state listings) it does seem that GW, in my opinion, has better identified (Ocean Hammock being just one of  a few exceptions ) what is worth noting.  

[THuckaby2]

Matt:

Read, noted, no comment other than methinks you doth protest too much.  

Your thorn,

TH

[John_Conley]

(Ocean Hammock being just one of  a few exceptions )

Matt:

I think we are on the same page.  I'm in agreement with you about Ocean Hammock, but I am able to accept the explanation that not enough people agreed with me.

I have a hard time accepting "Oakmont has more tradition than Shinnecock" because I don't know that differences in taste and opinion apply.

[Matt_Ward]

John:

The whole purpose in "discovering" Ocean Hammock is what ratings should be about. I mean why would I, or anyone else for that matter, buy any magazine for them to tell me something that is completely unworthy of the space they give these so-called "greatest" courses?

John, I agree with you 100% on the tradition and walking glob that is inserted simply to prop up the "name" courses from yesteryear at the expense of a number of solid new courses (the last 20-30 years). A true ratings should be free of deliberate manipulation and it should try to include people who really can understand what it is they are looking at when playing. It would be no different than throwing me on "Antique Road Show" and having me give an opinion on the value of some particular object. Heaven help many of them because as my wife will attest I'd probably throw some of the "antique gems" into the waste can.

John, when you say not enough people agreed with you on Ocean Hammock I have to ask them how they thought the course was deficient -- especially when you compare it to the others that WERE LISTED ABOVE IT? And, if they have not played it what prevents them? The whole purpose of any ratings is to give the reader real insight on what's happening with the game. Does that sound right or am I out-of-bounds?

[THuckaby2]

You are way out of bounds, Matt.  The purpose of ratings is whatever the magazine wants it to be.  It can be to uncover new discoveries, it can also be to uncover changes of thinking or status of old ones.  To say its definitively one way or the other does have you hitting three from the tee.  

TH

[Matt_Ward]

Tom H:

I know it can be tough to "defend" the impossible my good friend. I think you're doing well in the Mike McCurry role -- you remember him Tom -- the former White House press secretary who had to defend senor Bill on a daily basis! It became tough on Mike because he had to stand up at the podium while everyone else whacked him over the head because his boss didn't get it! In my mind -- GD doesn't get it.

GD inserted the "fudge" categories because of the Shadow Creek incident and the likelihood that it's esteemed panel would highlight many of the new courses (some deservingly so) for possible inclusion into the "100 Greatest." It's amazing you create a panel to "find" the best but deliebrately concoct a mechanism to make sure the results you get are not included. Why do you continue to tap dance with you wonderful "spin" that says otherwise. Sure, if the magazine wants to do whatever they want it's their business, but to sell / promote the outcomes as being the "definitive" measurement of golf course architecture in the USA is clearly a hoot in hubris.

GD is not the final barometer on course greatness ... although, I mean GD may believe it's so -- the bulk of people on GCA who do travel quite frequently and can legitmately make the kind of cross comparisons necessary to assess courses would come up with a far different listing particularly on the courses listed from 50-100 and especially so in many of the state listings which really show plenty of glaring omissions and some startling retentions that leave my head shaking.

Tom, my California thorn, I may have hit it OB, in your mind, but you're still standing on the tee whiffing it!

I have an opinion Tom -- it's mine period.

[THuckaby2]

We shall agree to disagree.  I just didn't want anyone to think yours was the sole or definitive opinion.  It's not.  Nor is mine.  

Just do realize that I fully agree with you that the best panel would be people who do this for a living and do nothing but this, taking time to see all relevant courses nationwide.  Where do I sign up?

Such a panel does not exist, nor will it ever - wishing won't make it so.

Thus sticking to today's reality, I have smacked one 270 down the middle - I know, a 2iron for you, but a long drive for me - and I stand proud there, representing real golfers, people who actually play the game.

Keep up the good work in any case.  And thanks again for the issues of Jersey Golfer you sent me - it is a very nice magazine and I sure wish we had a CA equal.  Of course reading back a bit over the weekend, I saw your criteria for assessing NJ courses.... hmmm... where have I seen a lot of that language before?  And including "conditioning" as a factor?  For shame, Matt - just what does that have to do with architecture?  

Just pulling your chain.  I obviously find your criteria fine enough for what you are trying to do.

TH

[Matt_Ward]

Tom H:

Touche my California thorn!

We do keep conditioning, but it's impact is far less than the astute inclusion of such other notable course assessment categories. Do you know what they may be?

How about tradition, walking and ambiance?  

P.S. I wonder how you believe the state listing for California turned out. Dare you venture there ...

[Tom_Doak]

Matt,

I honestly believe trying to rank courses below #100 in America or the top 5-10 in each state is just a waste of time.  They are all fives and sixes on the Doak scale, and individual opinions will be opposed on which of the sixes is "better."

It's easy to separate the cream off the top; the rest is all milk.

[THuckaby2]

Matt:

 .  Just wanted to kinda underscore that NO list is ever going to be "perfect."  And I surely did notice which criteria you do NOT include as well!

Of course I looked at GD's CA list.  I commented on such last week in one of the seemingly 500 threads ripping GD.  I have little problem with the top 30 - there are a few I'd include and omit, but on the whole it's not far off from how I see things.

TH

[Matt_Ward]

Tom:

I don't how much time you've been able to play in the last 4-5 years among the newer courses, but the competition is indeed tougher. The state listings, particularly in the most competitive of states (i.e. NY, NJ, Ohio, California, etc, etc) have indeed intensified as older courses are now going through the process of restoration, modernization, etc, etc). Couple that with some of the better public layouts that have entered the fray (i.e. Pac Dunes, to name just one).

It is no longer an automatic that "x" course which has always been rated will continue to be rated.

I've said this before that you can certainly expand ratings to include a top 200, but one need not specify that course "x" actually finished in "x" position. More likely, I'd like to see GD in a listing of ten as they previously did.

What raised my ire Tom is that certain courses for a top 5-10 in a state (i.e. Ocean Hammock in FL, The Kingsley Club in MI) were omitted. Clearly, when you start to go beyond a top 10 in many of the states all you are doing is going to be spinning the 19th hole debate over and over again. But, in the more competitive states the distinctions are going to be much more demanding because the depth of courses is that much more intense.

[THuckaby2]

That does make a hell of a lot of sense, Matt.  As for me, I've played more golf in the last 4-5 years than the 10 before that... so I am personally more in tune with this than I've ever been.  That being said, this isn't about me...

I do understand the competition and the great courses being built today do deserve to be acknowledged.  How much this comes at the expense of old courses which have lost no greatness is where the debate begins.  And if these old courses have a built-in advantage in assessment, well... I say tough shit and ask why shouldn't they?

TH

[higkgins]

Is Ocean Hammock worth the 3-3.5 hour drive from Port St.Lucie ??

[John_Conley]

Ocean Hammock is probably not more than 2 1/2 hours N on I-95.

It depends on how far you'd drive to play a good course.  I like Ocean Hammock and would consider it Top 15 in Florida at least.

[ChipOat]

Lots of good discussion is possible from this thread.

Here's the ones that jump out at me.

1) Harbour Town would go DOWN??  What tradition does HT have to lose?  I think it deserves every bit of its ranking on shotmaking requirements alone.

2) Mauna Kea would go UP??  Already overrated IMO and you can't walk.  Other than the first "big" course in Hawai'i, what tradition does it have?  Oahu CC, Mid-Pac and the original Wailae are all older and, mostly, better.

3) Fishers Island would go UP?  How much further can it go?  Superb Raynor layout and you may walk if you carry your own or pull a trolley.